capitalists believe if you want higher quality service you have to incentivize competition. the role for government is to prevent monopolies and duopolies, people having so much control that they are able to exert market pressure to provide less services at higher costs. but as long as you can make the case that you have a vibrant, competitive market, where people are trying to give higher quality service at lower costs, we should not be involved. >> as you know, there have been reports this week that s.e.c. officials have been meeting privately with telecom executives to possibly broker a legislative deal. should the agency be trying to seek a compromise with the industry, or has it overstepped its bounds? >> i think this is really kind of the debate now that we are talking about here in washington right now, where is there a legislative process? is there a role for policy debates, law signed by the president, and then you empower the regulators, reverses the regulators or someone else cutting the deal up to the regulatory aspect? we have a separation of power in our consti

in addition, smaller community banks would be incentivized to increase small business lending through an extended am more at thisization period of up to 10 years. the impact of this amendment deals with regional and small banks. it will be immediate and is a necessary step in providing greater availability of credit which will lead to job creation and economic growth. we had an earthquake on wall street about a year and a half ago. those aftershocks are still being felt by small businesses and small banks all across the country. and it is for that reason these banks in an effort to help small businesses regain their footing, deserve this kind of am more at thisization and flex -- amortizization with reflect to their portfolios. they did not cause the trouble they now find themselves in and we believe that am morization -- amortization is appropriate. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. who seeks time in opposition? mr. neugebauer: i do, mr. chairman. i am opposed to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized

green jobs is that if you require companies to get more electricity from wind farms, that will incentivize companies that make wind turbines to locate facilities in the united states that will create demand for steel that is used to make things like wind turbines haland that it will spe a lot of investment that lead to jobs. that is the clean energy, clean jobs comment. the counter argument you hear from republicans and a few democrats is will those so- called green jobs and be more than the jobs you might lose in the industry? like coal mining, oil, or oil production. so, that is why there is such disagreement between republicans and democrats on this issue, the question of how soon the jobs will be created and how many there will be. host: when has the senate majority leader said that he will bring this to the floor of the senate? guest: he wants to bring about this month. this is his chance to take the temperature of the members of the senate democratic caucus. his view is that he wants to get it done in july before the august resort -- recess. host: alabama, carol, independent line. ca

so itecom more and more apparent that the reco act is workg, that it's about small bune, incentiv, x relief for small busesses, search andevelopment, embcing science a chnology, budigrowing and innovatn eno, the are all dynamics. that meana growing economy and cutting gedesign and for at. i tnkt's a stro ceback and nd to mainin the ur of recovery. ms. wassermaschultz:a pant of twin sixth gaders, often wonr,, what e heck are your cleagues on the other side oe aisldog. they wonderhy they only foc on the mos narr view. mrtko: i had ump nch with the other side of the chamber and shake things up. but we have been joined by our colleague from oohio, mr. bo cherrr who is doing a fan tass particular job and a real fighter. mr. boccieri: thank you for taking on the challenge of setting the record straiggt. just as an aside, a few years ago as a state legislator, i was watching c-span and you and congressman ryan were talling a few years ago and i thought wow, how neat would it be to stand beside each other. so it's an honor to share this stage with you to talk about how we get our country bac

it can go to 1% if the bank increases its business lending by 10% or more, incentivizing banks to do the right thing, to ensure that banks actually use the federal funding they receive, the rate will increase and there are penalties to 7% if the bank fails to increase its small business lending at their institution within two years. to ensure that all federal funds are paid back within five years, the dividend rate will increase to 9% for all banks irrespective of their small business lending after 4 1/2 years. and let me just make it clear what the c.b.o. estimates that they provided to the congress telling us. c.b.o. estimates that this provision will save taxpayers $1 billion over 10 years as banks are expected to pay back these funds over 10 years with interest. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from missouri. mr. graves: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i don't have any other speakers on this side. i just might comment on this. you know, one of the frustrating things about our economic recovery right n

the loans because they will receive a better interest rate upon making loans such that they are incentivized to make these loans. so while the bill will not cure all of the ills of society, all of the ills that we have, it certainly will go a long way toward stimulating small business lending which is important to the economic recovery. i believe in this bill. i believe that this amendment will help with transparency and accountability. and i also believe that it is time for us to do all that we can to help the small businesses in this country. i believe that this is something we can do and i believe that it is something that will make a difference. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from texas. mr. neugebauer: i appreciate the gentleman. i still go back to the point and i think that's where we get kind of in a -- we live in wally world here in washington, d.c., where you still have to have $33 billion if you're going to go loan -- or invest in the preferred shares of these banks, you still got to find the $33 billion. and the truth of the matt

what we ought to be doing is incentivizing every single american derivatives trader to trade on u.s.ets and what this provision does is incentivizes those folks who don't want to have the expense of having their trades cleared, those entities who want to continue to do business as they are doing today to trade overseas versus trading on u.s. markets, where transparency would take place, so mr. chairman, there clearly is not the soundness and this rule that is being proposed. so i would urge the adoption of the amendment. >> senator lincoln? >> again mr. chairman i do appreciate my colleague from georgia and i would stay banks are still allowed under our bill or under this piece that we have received to be able to trade in derivatives. they are just simply going to be swapped and derivatives that are traditional and meet the core principles of banking if they are going to be traded in banks. and if they don't meet those core priiples than they are going to be spun out into a affiliate that could be under the bank holdi company to be dealt with with additional capital. the gentleman is

are all the subcontractors being incentivize to control the cost of parts?can the government control eds requirements and not change them, which disrupts the production process? those are examples. >> he say here the number of people working on this versus working on something else? >> we get a lot of that data, and it depends on the industry for some of that data. we scrutinize that and business practices and production practices, and we do the same so that we understand each and every cost that we are incurring in paying for something for the taxpayer, make sure in that we're scrutinizing those processes and tried to minimize them. >> like you said, [uninnelligible] but some of the costs being billed nottto the pentagon are not necessary. that affects the profits of companies. if you take them away -- >> that is not necessarily profit. if a given production process could be leaned out by using less material or people, that is just economical. those people are being paid now and they are not necessary -- those costs would not be incurred. so in efficiency d

decide you are going to make people accountable for bad management practices and we are going to incentivize in law good management. did you find that out and check out who on earth made that decision? >> unfortunately senator, i think there are been a lot of bad decisions along these lines in terms of contracting and in terms of our acquisition process, and so the acquisition, the bill that was passed tier of the president signed into law is an important aspect but at the end of the day what is really required is people who can execute a program efficiently and with a very sharp pencil for the taxpayer. i don't think we have had a sharp enough pencil lead in some cases i don't think we have had sharp enough managers. i think we are trying to more professionalize our acquisition workforce now, where we are substituting career civil service who have these skills for contractors to do in many cases have been doing it, but we just have to be a lot smarter and a lot tougher and a lot more effective in our execution of the program and as you suggested , and hold people accountable. >> the work yo

the age-old issue of how does one best incentiv 5ize exec is to perform well?ers can -- employees can determine whether something is right and leave. time tells and performance based compensation is something that is on shareholders' minds. whether they make corrector incorrect decisions -- the proof is in the pudding. as a function of how the funds recover over time. host: it is time to start buying out public pensions. the few hundred thousand now will be weighed cheaper than the payout. will there be any takers? guest: what i think he might be saying is that in order to reduce the pension obllgations, some states are trying to incentivize people not to receive their stream of payments but take a lump sum. oftentimes, the lump sum can look enticing to the potential recipients. when you do the present bout you calculation, it may well be not a good economic deal. host: why so? guest: because money now -- it depends on two factors. the first factor is the persons likely mortality. if a person will live a long time, yet their genetics are in their favor, an annu

does that incentivize you to do mightdo's because you more than $1 million in fees. is it really that much harder to rate a cdo than it is too great and mbs? >> i can only respond in respect to the overall approach. yet there is an opportunity to charge fees and that the market will bear, i think we would do that. we have fees that range from very, very modest -- particularly in the municipal bond sector -- tuttis that are more substantial for large corporations -- to duties that are more substantial for large corporations -- to fees that are more substantial for large corporations. >> looking back to this chart that commissioner graham brought in front of you, it strikes me that when you look at this in the face of contradictory information, the actual number of deals and rated in both cdo's and residential mortgage-backed securities goes up dramatically. even after you have had four or five major downgrades, you are still raking a whole bunch of deals that come forward. i will sort of give you a past to some extent on nobody knew that the market would go down as wa

there is a real need for ways to incentivize business investment, to put the labor force in haiti to work. >> what we have been working on is trying to figure out ways to take advantage of the tremendous amount of labor that is around us. everybody here wants to work. if you walk around the camp and speak any french or creole, everyone is right to ask you for a job. more than help or handouts, people want jobs. we are working through several grants. thank you for the support of u.s. aid. we try to get cash for work, paying people for the labor they are doing. >> i come hhre. i work every day from monday to sunday. >> do you like the work? >> i like it. you know, when you are giving water to other people it is like a medication that you give to the people. that is the reason why i loved that job. >> i am just hoping they will give us more help and help us get back on track. that is what i hope. >> what is it like for you to be able to help these people? >> i am happy, first of all at the mound -- first of all because in the morning i have somewhere to be. it is not easy to work with h

if you know there is a demand and you are getting incentivized from the taxpayers i wonder how hard you are really trying. that is the concern that i have. when i get reports from my own constituents that you are denying modifications without supplying a reason in your living bars facing foreclosure in limbo your explanation does not cut it. >> the increased our staff. we have invested in our systems. whave historically had a backlog of loans that are in trial. and now we are literally looking at a loan -- at every loan that is beyond its original trial. , looking at it loan by loan, making sure we do not leave any stone unturned to give folks a modification. >> what do i tell my constituents when they tell me chase will not work with them? they should call the 1-800 number. >> should i call that number? >> you should call it. >> i can call you, mr. lowman, on behalf of my constituents? >> yes. >> we can chat afterward. >> i would be happy to do it. >> i want to help you do more and better. >> we have a number i can put on the record. it is for anybody who has constituent complaints. we

what we ought to be doing is incentivizing every single american derivatives trader to trade on the u.s. market. what this provision does is incentivize those folks who do not want to have the expense of having their trade cleared, those entities who want to continue to do business as they are doing it today, to trade overseas bourses trading on u.s. trading in reversversus u.s. market where transparency would take place. >> again, i do appreciate my colleague from georgia, and i would say that banks are still allowed, under this piece that we have received, to be able to trade in derivatives. they are just simply going to be swapped as derivatives that are traditional and meet the core principles as banking if they are going to be traded in banks. if they do not meet those core principles, they will be spun out into an affiliate. and they will be dealt with with additional capital. the gentleman is right. that capital probably would not be taken up. but the fact is, if they are doing riskier business, the whole problem that we had was that that risky business was not appropriately capi

congress incentivized banks to do bad lending practices.hat is what led to a lot of this, not all of it. certainly there were other things that contributed. but that was certainly one part of it. if freddie and fannie told banks, we are not going to take these kinds of loans and a bundle and securitized them and sell them to institutional investors, they would stop those kinds of loans. they did not do that. they encouraged weaker and weaker underwriting standards that led to a lot of these subprime mortgage debacles. host: what is the impact on the economy at large? guest: in every piece of legislation like this -- as big as the 1933 act, certainly no one alive today have seen their regulatory reform bill this large. there are always unintended consequences in all big legislation like this. one will be the gentleman who just called, on the main street side. small businesses will be affected. people with credit cards, people like russell simmons who represents poor people. the irony is that people like the senate for responsible lending, pe

does that incentivize you to do mightdo's because you more than $1 million in fees. is it really that much harder to rate a cdo than it is too great and mbs? >> i can only respond in respect to the overall approach. yet there is an opportunity to charge fees and that the market will bear, i think we would do that. we have fees that range from very, very modest -- particularly in the municipal bond sector -- tuttis that are more substantial for large corporations -- to duties that are more substantial for large corporations -- to fees that are more substantial for large corporations. >> loing back to this chart thatommissioner graham brought in front of you, it strikes me that when you look at this in the face of contradictory information, the actual number of deals and rated in both cdo's and residential mortgage-backed securities goes up dramatically. even after you have had four or five major downgrades, you are still raking a whole bunch of deals that come forward. i will sort of give you a past to some extent on nobody knew that the market would go down as was ba

what we ought to be doing is incentivizing every single american derivatives trader to trade on u.s. markets and what this provision does is incentivizes those folks who don't want to have the expense of having their trades cleared, those entities who want to continue to do business as they are doing today to trade overseas versus trading on u.s. markets, where transparency would take place, so mr. chairman, there clearly is not the soundness and this rule that is being proposed. so i would urge the adoption of the amendment. >> senator lincoln? >> again mr. chairman i do appreciate my colleague from georgia and i would stay banks are still allowed under our bill or under this piece that we have received to be able to trade in derivatives. they are just simply going to be swapped and derivatives that are traditional and meet the core principles of banking if they are going to be traded in banks. and if they don't meet those core principles than they are going to be spun out into an affiliate that could be under the bank holding company to be dealt with with additional capital. the ge

mortgage that had a higher interest rates payable to the lender than a traditional mortgage which tn incentivize themwice as much to direct borrowers into sub-prime mortgages and -- to otherwise may have qualified for traditional mortgages. mr. mcdaniel, do you think that is a problem? why did you actually structured the fees payable to new peace in that way that gave you more if you rated -- moody's in that way that gave you more if you rated them higher. >> first of all, they were not aware of the severance in pricing in thei deliberations or analytical work or rating committee work. secondly, although i have not had a opportunity to do a comprehensive che, i did go back to look at rnbs applications in 2006 and 2007. the basis point fees were identical. >> our people say that the change in 2007 that led to 3.5%. that is a reduction in pricing wer. 3.5 basis points startin in 2007. >> i was able tlook at 2006 and it was idental in 2006, as well. i did not have a chance to do a comprehensive check. >> maybe you could do a comprehensive check and report back to us. you have nine basis points for

we've learned in prior hearings is that a significant element of fraud occurred when we double incentivized mortgage brokers in the origination of mortgages by paying them a higher perctage of the mortgage him if they a person into a motgage that paid a high rate of iterest and was more valuablto the lender. and in many instces wefound that the rates that they were paid where for example,% on putting people into a standard, 80/20 mortgage, and that paid a lower rate of interest. and 2% of the rigination, origination fees if they put them into a more expensive mortgage. which we believe in cerin instances lead mortgage brokers, because they would make twice as much money, lead mortage brers to leding borrwers to loans that were moe expensive to them, when they might hav qualified for a reasonable loan. now, i learned from our staffs investigaon repor and i want to clarify this, i want to make sure it's true, that for many years moody's, and charging issuers on rmbs analysis, you chard a cetain rate come in this insnce for .75 basis points, for the dollars that were in e senior tranche is. an

the american people agree, this week's winning youcut proposal would incentivize federal agencies to identify and eliminate underuality lies structures. according to the o.m.b. director, peter orszag, the federal government has 69,000 buildings and structures that meet this criteria. the total value of this excess property is nearly $19 billion. . the one time sale would generate reve news. the long-term savings would be more substantial. our real estate portfolio would allow the federal bureaucracy to function more effectively and efficiently and most importantly the taxpayers will not be on the hook for underused, sometimes vacant federal property. current law prohibits the disposal of wasted federal property and cashing in on the savings. the property must first be offered off as no cost to other government agencies to state and local governments, to nonprofit organizations, and others. only at the end of this process is property offered at a competitive public sale. federal taxpayers have missed opportunities to generate revenue and to reduce the deficit. for example, the federal

will that incentivize them from keeping that going? >> they reason they want to keep production going is not because they want to recoup. it alleviates pressure on the well floor. we will -- we were able to force mud down to where every suppressed the oil. the minute they stopped pumping, the oil came back up. they do not know the condition of the well. if you exert pressure on that, you would not want to push that out and head of the come up through the sea floor. they want to produce the oil for safety and containment reasons. >> should have to forfeit it? >> that is above my pair rating. they are the responsible party. they will bear the cost for exactly what the admiral is describing. the costs are likely to greatly exceed over what the oil that is recouped is sold for on the market. they are in for a response and recovery, penalties involved in the many billions of dollars. >> we are doing a national inventory right now. as the response has evolved, skimmers are in demand. we may have to make a decision at some point to move them

start to do that, including merit based pay for teachers, understanding we have to and sent -- incentivize this. if we have to think outside the box. we have to reform the way we fund education if we want to see any changes in the inequities. >> as a substitute teacher, i can tell you. the money should be in the classroom. do not the full. we continue to hear about money. if you do not put discipline back in the classroom and parents engaged in their children's education, you'll never fix the system. we have some schools that are great but those are schools that are filled with engaged parents. other schools, they cannot make it work matter how much money. my right hand and graduated from one of the worst schools in the president. he came from a broken home and qualified for free lunch. his mother decided education was first and foremost. he got it down. my wife is a first-rate school teacher. she says congressman and first graders have a lot in common. no child should did the third grade that is not at or above the third grade reading -- reading level. that is a long-term goal that we can

when the archbishop offered that sum to the king, he was not incentivizing the king to go to war appeared he was offering that money by way of a settlement, in order to -- to go to war. he was offering that money by way of a settlement. a bill had been introduced by certain members of parliament to reallocate states from the church to the crown. it was not really in the archbishop's interest for the king to go to war. wars are expensive. if the king did go ahead and go to war, he might very well have come back to the archbishop for more money or saw the support for the bill that was currently pending in the parliament. we do not think the partnership can fairly be charged with bias. >> is it not possible that henry threatened to seize the church property in order to bias the archbishop and his advice? >> there is no reason to believe that is true, not least because the bill in question was actually introduced in the time of henry iv. to the contrary, the current monarch warned the archbishop of canterbury that he would have blood on his hands it to give advice that turned out to be false.

guest: that is another area where there is a willingness in the government to come instead of incentivizeavings -- you know, in the past decade or so, we have seen more options, more ways that individuals can save tax incentives. i do not see anything on the immediate horizon that would take away the tax-the late treatment of retirement savings. host: leland in california. are you there? we are going to move on to alexandria. nate on the democratic line. caller: it is my understanding that a minimum value of an estate tax is $2 million. has that changed for 2010? guest: yes, it has. right now, there is no threshold in which an estate is taxed. because of a temporary repeal, all the states, no matter how large, are not subject to tax this year. host: on the estate tax. how much does the government get from that on average, are there ways for people to avoid paying the estate tax? guest: there is a whole industry of will to estate planning which advises wealthy people how to minimize their as state tax, illegally. it can range from just that people made in their lifetime. there is a certain

when we start to do that, including merit-based pay for teachers, incentivizing and mentors, we will have to think outside of boston and understand is all our communities get involved. we have to reform education if we want to see any changes in the inequities in this state -- as a substitute teacher, the money ought to be in the classrooms. but do not be fooled. we continue to hear about money for it if you don't put discipline back in the classroom and give parents in these struggles back engage in their child behavior and their child's education, you never fix the education system. we have schools that are great. their schools better filled with parents that are engaged -- go to other schools and they cannot make you work no matter how much money you pour into them. my right hand man graduate from the worst schools in the country. like me, he came from what could -- a poor home. his mother decided that education was first and foremost and he got it done. >> congressman and first graders at a lot and common. no child should leave the third grade hatter about third grade education.

should they have to forfeit that oil and that profit to this incentivize them from keeping them going? >> the reason they want to keep the production going is what -- not to what they may recoup. we did the top kill, we were able to force mud down where we suppress the oil. when they stopped pumping, the oil came back up. the reason they came back up -- did not go any further as they did not know the condition of the wellbore and the casing. you to produce the oil for safety and containment reasons. >> should they have to forfeit the oil? what about the skimmers? >> that is above my pay grade. >> they're going to bear the cost for what the admiral is describing. i think those costs are likely to greatly exceed what the oil that is recouped is sold for on the market. they are in for -- on response and recovery, there would be penalties that will be involved in this, in the many billions of dollars. >> people are asking, where the skimmers? >> we are doing a national inventory. as the response has evolved, the skimmers -- the quantity and demand, we're looking at the right now. we may h

it is important because we do not want to incentivize people coming into this country illegally, ande do not want to create citizens as a reward to their parents to have broken the law coming here. >> thank you for that question, michael. the biggest issue is to have a policy that can affect the issue. the federal government is ignoring its responsibility. sometimes people's feelings on both sides are not anti- immigrant. i have a lot of friends who are hispanic all over the world. and as americans, we need to get back to the fundamental principles. we have a system of legal immigration that does not work today. if we fix that and secure our borders and spend the resources we need to to ensure that we can defend our borders, then we will be on the right track. today if you want to come into this country legally, it takes five years and $5,000 and maybe we let you in. across the border, the door is open all day long. it is a perverse incentive. we have to remove the incentive for illegal immigration and make it easier for people to follow the law. we punish employers who are following

you're not going to incentivize people to start businesses if you raise taxes on people who start the business. host: betty on the independent line. hi, bedy. caller: yes. i live on the retirement of my husband, who was a federal employee. host: mm-hmm. caller: and i spend my money on paper every month. and when that smun gone, i quit spending. in plain, simple terms, why does the got to the create all this money that i can't even fathom trillions and trillions. host: sorry, betty, i thought you were done. well put. i couldn't say it better. guest: americans across the country are struggling to pay their bills. one of the things that has happened. we all know one of the reasons we got in this resession, we were spending too much money. you and i and businesses around of course, government were spending too much money and we had to reign in that money. but the good news is households are beginning to pay down their debts. businesses are starting to save more. there's only one institution that's not saving. that's the government. while we're saving, the government is mass ily borrowing.

we may do them to incentivize small businesses that do not have access to tax credits. we have increased the cash flow for small businesses by providing a five-year operating loss carry back. we have cut capital gains tax is for investment in small business. we have created tax credits for small businesses to give health benefits. the president has a new initiative on exports, which you referenced very briefly. we tend not to think about the opportunities for small businesses to increase their outreach to the market. there is an initiative that the president has to double that export number. we are looking at two areas to expand the investment tax credits to help innovative new businesses and small businesses that have a hard time accessing capital. i wanted to know what you think of that. many of us believe that the new technology in the energy and the health sector are great growth areas for the united states. we have always been on the cutting edge of innovation and technology. i would like you to comment on the steps we have taken. they will make a difference in exp

on going further weight, those vested interests that you voted for your committee, and static incentivizes the kind of say, increase in the context of elected officials or candidates and their constituents. it drives in the right direction as far as voters are concerned. it is a big chain. there are number proposals that voters want big changes. something changes 180 degrees if they were not paying attention to their knees. the other thing it does is it relates -- relieves candidates of any need to court big oil lobbyist for their money or a total wall street for their money. a cozy relations right now between lobbyists and candidates -- one final note. this is out there on the table. there are 115 co-sponsors right now for this bill in the house. 20 in the senate. the previous high water in the house was shy of 60. we have organizers in 24 states. we have generated 24,000 phone calls into legislative offices over the past month in favor of the spirit the numbers are going up. we have support from unlikely sources like business leaders lining up says the citizens united decision and increa

build a big box and in a few years they are going to move down the road anyway, because we have incentivizedhe tax system so that corporations keep money off shore to companies that don't charge high income tax. -- to countries that don't charge high income tax. guest: what you said about what cities can't or should not be doing in the future, what counties should not be doing in the future is important because, of course, once a city deals with its current problems, that may have been caused by some of the -- you know, the activities you mentioned. one would hope that politicians would learn a lesson and not get the city back into that sort of debt situation. >> ralph, republicans. >> ralph, republicans. hi, there. >> hi, you know, the pension obligations parallels to me what these kind of obligations did to the steel industry. i remember as a child years ago, promises deficits were run by the unions. why would they agree to these? he made the point, he said the executives are dead and gone by the time they come due. it's the same situation here. people who spend the money are not held acco

governors of each state to identify companies, american companies that are doing business abroad and incentivize the repatriation of jobs back to america. this is necessary and feasible. earlier in year "the wall street journal" reported that a major american manufacture, caterpillar, was considering expanding its manufacturing inside the u.s. rather than overseas. according to the article, the repatriation is gaining momentum, and after a decade of rapid globalization, economists say that companies are seeking -- are seeing disadvantages on offshore production, including shipping costs, complicated logistics and quality issues, political unrest and theft of intellectual property poses additional risk. i applaud on caterpillar's efforts and ask every company should follow its lead. i believe that every american company has a moral obligation to try to create jobs in america. american companies with overseas factories take ample advantage of american law enforcement, the american justice system and countless other resources provided by the american taxpayer. in doing so they have an obligation, a

but in the aggregate, something like $6 billion worth of tax advaatage to incentivize these companies to continue to pay the health insurance for their retirees was taken away. well, they were required, the companies, as a cost of their bottom line, the s.e.c. requirement was that they immediately let the s.e.c. to know to make a filing to that effect. and they were threatened to be druged before the energy and commerce committee and prove they weren't lying. now, madam speaker, my colleagues and the american people, that is a pretty scary scenario, is it not? is it not? it's unbelievable is what it is, but these companies submitted all the required documents that the committee demanded and then the committee realized that the compannes were right and they were wrong. this was an ungin -- unintended consequence and this bill is riddled with stories like that. and it's been three months and we are finding something new like that almost every day. here's also what we got as i refer you back. obamacare hurts all employers. independent survey on obamacare. 97% of employers responded that

if we are going to incentivize mortgage servicers to provide thirt-party counseling to those behind on those payments, then we need to get to those who are hurtinghe most. my amendment would have counseling serves to areas of the country that have been hardest hit by financial crisis. i urge my colleagues on both sideof the aisle to support this amendment and help tho who need it the most. serve the balance of my the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleladfrom west virginia rise? mr capito: d like to claim time in opposition ahough i amot opposed to e amendment. the chair: the gentlelady is gnized. mrs. capito: thank you, mr. chairman. i ri in support of the amendment offered by the gentleman from california. as my colle from california knows all o well, rising foreclosure and delinquency rates continue to affect all areas of the mortgage market. secondary markets for mortgages have seen a gnificant drawback that has led to a reduction in thevailability redit. lenders have tigened credit standards making it more difficult for delinquen

it deals with salaries so we don't incentivize too big of risk taking by executives so they put their banks or their financial organizations at risk. and it deals with too big to fail. putting a structure in place so that if financial institutions get way out there, overleveraged as we saw in 2008 that we have a system in place where we can liquid ate them and close them, not put them on life support in a bankruptcy, as my republican colleagues would suggest. this is a time to bring certainty back in the market, reasonable regulation and reasonable enforcement back in the financial system. the bill that's being brought to this congress and this house today does just that. and with that this country needs to rein in wall street, we need to protect main street and the taxpayers and the people that live throughout this country. this bill goes a long way to doing that. with that i urge a yes vote on the previous question and on the rule. i yield back the balance of my time and i move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: all time for debate has expired. without

we are burning longer than they have ever incentived boom. we are learning as we go everyday.n amazing group of people out there doing this there's n amazing cast working on this 14-15 hours a day. >> this is the controlled burn unit. we have cameras on board all vess ills.3 we are trying to capture the oil in the boum. two fishing boats. the oil builds up and we send that igniting team over >> a measure that they utilized to get how many barrels. the minimal amount to the maximum amount. they'll come over approximately 1,000 feet and let us know what the deep, darkest, blackest oil is coming from. this one here, what we are doing here is charting where these are in relationship to the main site. jo the center is where the incident occurred. >> this is our task force right here. anything around here where the oil is coming up, this is where the caps are on it. all these vess ills here are skimming. whatever they can't get on the skim, we try to get on the burn. they are right at the site, 60 miles off shore. the oil that gets dispursed is hard to burn. we can't get it later. i

intellectual capacity, the ability to do research, and talk them into moving -- move them over, incentivizehire people who will focus their research on the direct improvement of k-20 education, so we know more about the connections between special development and instruction. we can then be partners, the intellectual partners and help inform ourselves as to how to improve what we are doing. >> 1 will put on the table is literally, how are we going to count stuff? right now the entire system is built up around counting up ccntact hours. that is what they are called. they are also called butt-in- seat hours. learning is defined by the number of hours a student is in front of a professor. degrees and credit and funding are built around that. what are you going to replace that with? this has ramifications across the entire system. that is a toughhtechnical not, and a tough conceptual nut that we are going to have to crack. >> i know that in sacramento, you have no worries. [laughter] >> in public education, that is an easy one for the governor and the state. the biggest problem we have is chang

perhaps the best of interest, instead what's incentivized the kind of behavior that voters want to seeat's increasing the contacts of elected officials for candidates and their constituents. so it drives people in the right direction as far as voters are concerned. it's also a big chang i think there are a number of proposals out there that voters want big changes. it's something that changes 180 degrees gets the candidates doing what voters want. paying attention to their needs. the other thing it does is it reveals candidates of any needs to court big oil lobbyist or go to wall street for their money. the cozy relationship right now with specialist and lobbyist and candidates is rendered unnecessary in this program. one fina note, this is out there. it's on the table. there are 150 cosponsors right now. it's shy of 60. we have organizers, coalition of informers that generated 20,000 phone calls into legilative offices over the past month. in favor of this, thenumbers are going up. we've also gotten support from unlikely places, political donors themselves are tired of this are lining

we have done investment tax credits for biofuels as a way to incentivize small businesses who do not have a assets and built to take tax credits. we have extended bonus depreciation for small businesses for making capital investments. we increased the cash flow. we provide a five-year operating loss carry back. we have cut capital gains taxes for small businesses. we have actually treated tax credit for small businesses to provide health benefits. the president has a new initiative on exports. you referenced the export businesses. need for small businesses tthe increase in their outreach to the markets in the world and to deal to sell their proddcts around the world. there is an initiative that the president has endorsed to double those numbers. we are looking to the future to expand these tax credits. we can help innovative new businesses and small bussnesses that have trouble accessing wanted to know what you think of that. -- have trouble accessing credit and wanted to know what you think of that. they will make a difference and expanding growth and we hope thht it will be in jobs

i'm looking at this how do we best incentivize in a free market these companies to do the right thing. obviously we wanted them to -- if you have a free market then they pay for those damages. professor galligan, do you want to start with that? >> yes. the whole lawn economics theory of tort law is based on what you just said. which is that for there to be an effective optimal deterrent scheme in tort law you have to face the full costs of your activities because when you decide what to do and how to do it, if you don't have to pay a cost, if you see a cap, if you see a liability limitation, it is rational as an economic actor to not consider that cap. that's the basis of the judge's work on law and economics. and law and economics, as you know, has become one of the prevalent theories, along with correctives justice, with tort law. >> and i took a class from professor easterbrook. i keep going back to that and it seems the an tit cis. it seems being from the midwest and the ethanol industry, they have to have insurance. i am not sure they have some major law in place if a ethanol pla

decide you are going to make people accountable for bad management practices and we e going to incentivize in law good management. did you find that out and check out who on earth made that decision? >> unfortunately senator, i think there are been a lot of bad decisions along these lines in terms of contracting and in terms of our acquisition process, and so the acquisition, the bill that was passed tier of the president signed into law is an important aspect but at the end of the day what is really required is people who can execute a program efficiently and with a very sharp pencil for the taxpayer. i don't think we have had a sharp enough pencil lead in some cases i don't think we hve had sharp enough managers. i think we are trying to more professionalize our acquisition workforce now, where we are substituting career civil service who have these skills for contractors to do in man cases have been doing it, but we just have to be a lot smarter and a lot tougher and a lot more effective in our execution of e program and as you suggested and hold people accountable. >> the work you are

if you know there is a demand and you are getting incentivized from the taxpayers i wonder how hard you are really trying. that is the concern that i have. when i get reports from my own constituents that you are denying modifications without supplying a reason in your living bars facing foreclosure in limbo your explanation does not cut it. >> the increased our staff. we have invested in our systems. we have historically had a backlog of loans that are in trial. and now we are literally looking at a loan -- at every loan that is beyond its original trial. , looking at it loan by loan, making sure we do not leave any stone unturned to give folks a modification. >> what do i tell my constituents when they tell me chase will not work with them? >> they should call the 1-800 number. >> should i call that number? >> you should call it. >> i can call you, mr. lowman, on behalf of my constituents? >> yes. >> we can chat afterward. >> i would be happy to do it. >> i want to help you do more and better. >> we have a number i can put on the record. it is for anybody who has constituent complaint

who have the intellectual capacity, the ability to do research, and talk them into moving over, incentivizement of education so that we know more about the connections between professional development and construction. we know more about policy and measurement. that we can then be partners, not just the people that produce -- the people that helped informed legislators and ourselves about how to improve what we're doing. >> dewayne matthews? >> when i will put on the table is how are we going to count stuff? the entire system is built around counting contact hours. that is what they are called. the number of hours a student is in front of a professor. degrees are built around that. critics are built around that. financial aid is built around that. everything. what are you going to replace that with? >> learning outcome? what that is right. this has ramifications across the entire system. that is a tough technical not to crack but it is one we have to. >> bonnie reiss i know you have no worries. >> public education it is easy. for the governor, myself and the state, the biggest challenge we